Comparative evaluation of the cyclic fatigue resistance of R-Motion® in comparison to two competitive systems: An in-vitro study based on a case report

Aim To compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of R-Motion (R) (R) with two competitive systems (WaveOne Gold (R) (R) and Reciproc Blue (R)) (R) ) in a simulated root canal based a case report. Methodology A metal replica, designed as a copy of length and curvature of a mesiobuccal canal of an upper first molar originating from a case report, was used as a test phantom to measure the cyclic fatigue resistance of the following files: R-Motion (R) 25, WaveOne Gold (R) (R) primary, and Reciproc Blue (R) (R) R25. A total of 16 file per group tested in the same reciprocation motion and cyclic fatigue was measured as time file fracture. An unpaired t-test was used analyze the data. Results A statistically significant difference (P < 0,05) was noted between R-Motion (R) (R) 25 files and WaveOne Gold (R) (R) primary files. A statistically significant difference (P < 0,05) was noted between R-Motion (R) (R) 25 files and the Reciproc Blue (R) (R) R25 files. R-Motion (R) (R) 25 files were associated with a significant increase in the meantime to fracture when compared to WaveOne Gold (R) (R) primary files (397,69 +/- 66,63 vs 173,50 +/- 24,60, respectively) and the Reciproc Blue (R) (R) R25 files (397,69 +/- 66.63 vs 205,13 +/- 39.43, respectively). Conclusion R-Motion (R) (R) 25 file showed a significantly higher cyclic fatigue resistance compared to WaveOne Gold (R) (R) primary file and the Reciproc Blue (R) (R) R25 file.